Oh yeah, I'm trolling. As usual, the easy copout response to reading something that you don't like. Nevermind the fact that Lloyd is the best boundary receiver the league has seen since Cris Carter, I'm the one trolling because some other doofus seems to think Lloyd unnecessarily jumps to make catches "look better".

This place isn't much better than webzone in terms of cringe-worthy stupidity.

I just noticed this...wow...Lloyd is the best boundary receiver since CC? Lloyd, the same WR who's been on 6 teams in 10 years and has had one 1000 yard receiving season? I know stats aren't anything but take Lloyd out of McDaniels' scheme and he's been a non-factor on every other team. I think you should be making the case for how Lloyd is a mediocre to bad receiver that only produces because of his scheme instead of Welker.

I just noticed this...wow...Lloyd is the best boundary receiver since CC? Lloyd, the same WR who's been on 6 teams in 10 years and has had one 1000 yard receiving season? I know stats aren't anything but take Lloyd out of McDaniels' scheme and he's been a non-factor on every other team. I think you should be making the case for how Lloyd is a mediocre to bad receiver that only produces because of his scheme instead of Welker.

Ssshhhhhh don't be logical! No one wants to hear something that makes sense

Lloyd has always IMO been seen as a very talented WR. His problem is what's going on between his ears and his consistency.

Playing in the Pats offense has helped Lloyd, it didn't make him.

Have people already forgotten the monster season he had in Denver with the mighty Kyle Orton throwing him the ball??

...who called the plays for him that year in Denver? How did he do the next year after that playcaller was fired? Where did that playcaller go? Who traded for him from Denver? Where did that playcaller go next? Who signed him then? Who is calling the plays for him in NE?

...who called the plays for him that year in Denver? How did he do the next year after that playcaller was fired? Where did that playcaller go? Who traded for him from Denver? Where did that playcaller go next? Who signed him then? Who is calling the plays for him in NE?

Had to rep you for my forgetting who was the HC for the Broncos. Just saying Lloyd is a talented WR. He's not a system guy.

I think we need better analogies here because I'm not going to read anything longer than a paragraph or two.

Wes Welker is like that pretty hometown girl who cooks for you, does laundry, and doesn't cheat on you. His attributes aren't the greatest, but he's pretty cute, not fat, and is always at home and not at the club with some other dude.

Other wide receivers are like actresses/models. They look better on the outside, but when Ryan Gosling has them alone in his trailer...its over. The sex is great, but sometimes you just want that hometown girl that you can trust. That's Wes Welker. He's not the flashiest, but for better or worse, he's always there.

In this analogy the sex is better with Welker though. I mean basically everything about the actress makes it seem like she should be better but Welker is far more productive... (maybe it's because of the bed she used...).

It's a chicken and the egg... you can't run the system without the right pieces and the right pieces wont work without the system. In the end, Welker is one of the most productive receivers in the league, he benefits from the system he is in and the system he is in benefits from him.

I mean Brady's numbers before this "system" were pretty pedestrian in comparison to the numbers after. Is he a system QB? Randy Moss has floated between god mode and non-existent, was it just the system he was in that made him productive? See how stupid it is to try and say that a player is only productive because of the system they are in? The job of a coach is to create a system and pick the talent to suit that system. Be that a WCO that creates value in RBs who can catch, the patriots option route system that creates value in WR/TEs that can read a defense and make subtle adjustments in their routes to create openings or a ZBS like the Broncos ran that rewards decisive cut back runners. The entire idea of the system is to get the most out of it's players.

The funny thing about systems though is they don't work without the right players and being the right player makes you a good player because your skillset fits what is required. The out of this world athletes will prosper in any system but having a skillset that fits a system perfectly and producing consistently great seasons in that system make you a great player. Take someone like DeMarcus Ware, for all we know he is a system player who would be a shell of what he is in another system, of course we don't know because he is great in that system and allows the Cowboys to remain in that system, he is a legitimately great player in the system he has played in, just like Welker is in his system.

Does anyone think that the pats let welker go and go after Amendola in the offseason?

I don't know why they would but I think Amendola would be a great fit in that role in the system if they did, if he could stay healthy I think he could produce some pretty damn good numbers for the Rams as well though.

I think it would be a bigger mistake by the Rams to let Amendola go than it would be for the Patriots to try and replace Welker with him as Amendola is a top notch receiver.

Too critical of Welker. You're punishing him for being good at what he does. This game is changing.. just because he's not the prototypcial WR that we are used to, doesn't mean he isn't a good WR. When I see Welker a see a guy who maxes out his strengths as a football player and PRODUCES.

Ok, well you started a thread called "So do people still believe the Patriots skill players are good?" If you would like a well thought out response this question then here it is...yes

Now, it is clear the motive behind the thread was to criticise Welker, and that's fine, however people have backed up why they think Welker is a valuable weapon for the Pats yet all you have done is say anyone could do it, imagine Crabtree on the Pats, blah blah blah

If it was such an easy thing to do more teams would do it. It has been stated that the fact the top slot WRs were undrafted "try hard" guys because they were easier to find, however guys like Percy Harvin, Randall Cobb etc disprove that theory, and someone like Tavon Austin will continue to disprove that theory in April.

Michael Crabtree can do a lot more than what Welker can, but it's a silly hypothetical to say that he could do what Welker is doing in New England only better. Firstly because Tom Brady is a guy who needs to have confidence in his WRs before he will throw him the ball. It happened with Johnson last year. He ran the wrong routes, lined up incorrectly and dropped some passes. After that Brady just didn't trust him and it became evident.

The Pats offense is based on the WRs being on the same page as Brady, being able to identify coverages and run the appropriate route and then to make the play. The 49ers offense is completely different. I don't know enough about it to determine what all is asked of their WRs, however I can say for almost certainty that no team in the NFL runs as many option routes as the Pats. How can you sit there, with no extra information and declare that Crabtree will simply fit in with the Pats and be able to be on the same page with Brady pre snap, identify the defense based on tendancies learned through film study, identify how he is being covered (inside leverage, outside, bracket coverage, zone), identify the protection issues (is he the hot read on a blitz?) and then run the correct route at the correct depth with the correct timing?

Simple answer is you can't. You can assume that Crabtree could simply waltz into New England and do all of this, but nothing I have seen from him says he would be perfect at it 100% of the time, and there is nothing that can prove it because it is a hypothetical situation. You can try to project how any player will do on any team, but there's a reason why players bust when drafted, there's a reason why free agents fail. Because nothing is guaranteed. Welker does what he does and there is a tangible product at the end. Guessing that Crabtree could do similar or better means nothing

All throughout that post and I see no mention about the amount of passing attempts the Patriots have compared with the 49ers.

I ask again....how many yards and "CATCHEZZZZ" would good ole' Wes have if he played in a run first offense?

I just noticed this...wow...Lloyd is the best boundary receiver since CC? Lloyd, the same WR who's been on 6 teams in 10 years and has had one 1000 yard receiving season? I know stats aren't anything but take Lloyd out of McDaniels' scheme and he's been a non-factor on every other team. I think you should be making the case for how Lloyd is a mediocre to bad receiver that only produces because of his scheme instead of Welker.

Lloyd was already flashing that ability in SF with Tim Rattay before Hitler himself Mike Nolan threw him under the bus and sucked off Alex Smith for a few years(until Nolan realized what a shitcan Smith was).

You're caught up in the stats again, and you don't have the intellectual ability to provide context for yourself when it comes to those stats. QB play, scheme, and passing attempts all play a huge role in the end of the year tally.

Again, Lloyd was the guy who torched the 49er top 5 pass defense with amazing reception after amazing reception on Sunday night. Wes was the guy who got shut down by a worse corner than Lloyd faced and only had 1 big play on a play action fake that had him wide open in the flat.

All throughout that post and I see no mention about the amount of passing attempts the Patriots have compared with the 49ers.

I ask again....how many yards and "CATCHEZZZZ" would good ole' Wes have if he played in a run first offense?

No one can answer this.

Cause it's a pointless hypothetical which has nothing to do with how well Welker has been playing and producing because he's not in a run first offense, he's in an offense built around a very complex option route based passing game. And for that he's a fantastic fit and his production show it. Is he a top 5 receiver league wide? No, but that doesn't make him not an dangerous part of that New England passing game which is certainly more than just good.

__________________
BK

Quote:

Originally Posted by AcheTen

JPP is a better and more productive player than Brandon Graham

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

Is Shaun Hill a top 10 QB? Definitely not. Is he a top 20 one? Almost certainly.

Cause it's a pointless hypothetical which has nothing to do with how well Welker has been playing and producing because he's not in a run first offense, he's in an offense built around a very complex option route based passing game. And for that he's a fantastic fit and his production show it. Is he a top 5 receiver league wide? No, but that doesn't make him not an dangerous part of that New England passing game which is certainly more than just good.

Scheme, Scheme, Scheme. This why you don't rate football player's talent based on their statistics. It would be one thing if the dude was winning on the outside and had a decent YPC, but the guy is always just a 10-11 YPC guy in an offense that slings it around as much as anyone.

Iím not just tossing that word around. Wes Welker is a great slot receiver. Heís one of the best in the business. Being great at something and being an all-time great are two different superlatives. I have never seen someone nominate Welker as a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Thatís ridiculous. But characterizing a critical option in two of the most prolific offenses of all-time as just ďusefulĒ isnít much better.

I don't see him doing anything that separates himself from plenty of other slot receivers. I think Brandon Stokley was better, personally.

Tom Rathman also played a "critical option" in some of the most prolific offenses of all-time. Great? Hardly. Useful role player is more like it.

Quote:

Again, outside receivers own the premium. Given the choice, no one (in their right mind) would pick Wes Welker over Calvin Johnson. But guess what? The value of the slot receiver is rising in the draft, too. The reason? The game is gravitating toward personnel groupings. Itís a weapons game. One stud outside isnít as transformative as it used to be. Itís about putting weapons all over the place, remaining multiple, and pushing the pace.

What the game is gravitating towards is offensive shootouts, where receivers all over the place are putting up inflated numbers.

Quote:

Slot receivers contribute in all of those areas. Defenses want to defend inside-out. Thereís not a defensive coordinator that just concedes the middle of the field to an offense. Thatís their prized ground. Therefore, a slot receiver that can manipulate the middle has high value. Drags and screens arenít going to bust defenses of all sorts. Sight adjustments are a huge component.

I don't know where you got that idea. Monte Kiffen, on the Bucs' philosophy of defense (paraphrasing): "We're going to be as wide as the widest guy, as deep as the deepest guy, and everything wiggling around in the middle, we're going to hit."

A lot of teams give up the underneath stuff and play more of a "bend but don't break" kind of scheme. That's where the Patriots go to work.

Quote:

Pardon the bluntness, but thatís just not true.

People love to throw out the ďproductĒ label. But itís a label of laziness. Itís a broad, convenient, generalized term that doesnít address all aspects of football.

Weíre dealing with differing degrees rather than absolutes. For example, calling Earth a planet is accurate. Calling Earth a terrestrial planet is more accurate.

Itís the same concept with ďproductsĒ in the NFL.

Tom Brady is a scheme-diverse quarterback. Heís an all-time great. A first-ballot Hall of Famer. But that doesnít change that, to a degree, heís a ďproductĒ of a situation. Heís one of the greatest quick-strike, timing passers Iíve ever seen. The Patriots make a concerted effort to tailor their scheme to those specifics strengths. And for good reason. Heís surgical in that scheme. Now, separate him from his scheme and install a different one. With the same personnel, ask him to forget underneath stuff. Ask him to take five- and seven-step drops with slow-developing vertical routes. Ask him to drive the ball downfield at an abnormal rate. Is he still a top-tier quarterback? Sure. Are his numbers still as sparkling? Those interception and completion percentages numbers are about to fluctuate.

The difference is, Brady is a great quarterback. If he were doing nothing in the Patriots' scheme but throwing easy, underneath passes, you could call him a "product of a system" and say he hasn't really proven anything. But as we've seen over the years, he can throw the intermediate and deep routes quite well.

A "product of a system" isn't just a guy who has his numbers inflated by the scheme. It's a player who would not excel outside that system.

Brady would not put up the same numbers in the kind of offense you are suggesting, but he'd still be more successful than most.

Wes Welker, if you lined him up outside and asked him to work one-on-one with a corner? He would never last as a starter. He would go from "first team All Pro" to, "backup/special teams duty."

Quote:

Donít let Peyton Manning make calls at the line. Just give him a run-it signal and the exact, non-negotiable call.

Numbers decline, still would be better than most.

Quote:

Donít let Calvin Johnson run a route past the sticks.

If you did that, he'd still put up better numbers than Welker.

Quote:

Donít let Rob Gronkowksi release on the same amount of passes.

I'm not a Gronkowski fan, either, but operating under the proposition that he is a great pass catching tight end...again, that's just a claim about what would happen to his numbers.

Quote:

Donít let Geno Atkins break two-gap responsibilities.

If he can't play the run at the point that well, he's not a complete defensive tackle.

Putting Tim McDonald in center field and not letting him play in the box to fill the run would have been detrimental to him and he would've been out of football. The fact that he was poor in coverage was a knock on him.

Players who struggle in certain aspects of the game are criticized for not being complete players.

But for some reason, Wes Welker seems exempt from this as far as the media is concerned.

The other difference is - the guys you listed all truly excel in some area where most others don't.

I don't believe Welker truly excels at much of anything, and what he does do well is something that is easy to find. That's why he's overrated, and that's why he's a product of a system. I believe you could plug Julian Edelman into his role and get similar production. I believe you could do the same with Eddie Royal and Jordan Shipley. I believe you could exceed his production with Randall Cobb.

Quote:

It sounds ridiculous, but NFL coaches are paid to put their assets in the best possible position. That means evaluating a skill set and building the framework of a scheme around what that person excels at. The elite are still going to be successful. But their results will differ.

And some skills are pretty much a requirement for any receiver to even make it into the NFL. Those are the types of skills required in what the Patriots do on offense. If you have more ability than what is required, it will show through. If you're Randy Moss, they'll take more shots down the field than before...because Belichick is not a moron.

If you're Steve Smith, all of a sudden those short passes will be going for long gains.

If you're Larry Fitzgerald, there will probably be quite a few more jump balls thrown to different areas of the field...because Belichick is not a moron.

When you can't do anything special, you become a Wes Welker-type. A guy who can't get deep and who won't break anything for a long gain after the catch, but who will be open regularly underneath when it's all spread out and he's matched up with linebackers. A guy who can catch the screens and stay behind his blockers as long as possible and pick up positive yardage.

You get a guy who catches 100-something passes, but averages just 11 yards/catch and scores few touchdowns.

Quote:

How come Chad Johnson wasnít able to do it then? After almost a decade of top-notch production, he just disappeared. He went from being a low-end number one/high-end number two to an afterthought that averaged a single catch per game.

First of all, Chad was clearly on the downside of his career when leaving Cincinnati. After his resurgence to the "low-end number one/high-end number two" status you mention in 2009, he proceeded to put up just 67-831-4 in 2010.

When he got to New England, he barely played. You can't produce if you're not on the field. The rumors going around were that he didn't know the playbook. He may have simply been in the wrong mind state when he got there and not even bothered to try to learn it. You never know with Chad...he's a weirdo.

Quote:

Because it is a core attribute. A lot goes into doing it at Welkerís level. The Patriots lean on choice routes much heavier than an overwhelming number of NFL teams. That means the volume of information that Welker must compartmentalize and digest during preparations and during the game is much higher than most. He needs to memorize a wealth of nomenclature. Formations, protections, shifts, splits, motions, alerts, snap counts, etc. Then he needs to start diagnosing the defense. The alignment of safeties, the depth of safeties, the depth of corners, the alignment of linebackers, the depth of linebackers, the technique of defensive linemen, etc. Once he has his pre-snap read, he pieces together the information. What to do in response to the coverage, what to run against that defense, what depth to run it at, etc.

Again, you seem to be suggesting he's some sort of "braniac" at the receiver position. I'm not buying it to begin with...and even if that were true, so what? Stephen Hawking could probably catch some of the passes Welker has from his wheelchair. Football is not and will never be a nerd's profession.

I'm quite certain there are plenty of receivers capable of learning these intricacies. I'm sure it pales in comparison to what quarterbacks have to learn.

Quote:

And thatís just against blander defenses when coming out of a huddle. Against defenses that mix up pre- and post-snap looks, he has to react and better not get it wrong. In a no-huddle situation, he has to process all of that information in a contracted period of time with simplified nomenclature.

What he really has to do is recognize what the coverage is and try to run to where they ain't. He's not facing octuple coverage, and he doesn't get open on every single passing play. What he tries to do, when he's not catching a screen, is make the logical decision. If he's matched up with a linebacker, that's probably a good matchup. If he's going against zone, he has to figure out where the hole in the zone is, or head towards the zone of someone who is a good matchup. If there's a dropped coverage, he's trained to turn around and look for the ball. One of his catches against the 49ers came off a double blitz on his side of the field. When given a free release and space to operate, he knows to look for the ball.

Not that complicated.

You want to know the ways most teams try to get a receiver involved in the offense when defenses are covering him well?

Throw him a screen/hitch, put him in motion, and/or send him across the middle on a drag route. These are the tried, true, and effective ways to get around just about any defense in order to force the ball to a receiver.

And these are the very same ways Welker catches most of his passes.

Quote:

I was at the game and didnít focus on Welkerís matchup from start-to-finish, but there were times he gained separation and the ball wasnít thrown in his direction. Beside, itís one game. Iíve seen Welker beat Revis. Iíve seen Stevie Johnson beat Revis. Does that make them equals? No, not even close. Pros are capable of beating pros. Tramon Williams held Calvin Johnson to five catches on a 10 or so YPC clip a couple weeks ago. Does that make Calvin more useful than dominant? No, not even close.

I sincerely doubt you've legitimately seen Welker beat Revis. What you saw, if you're thinking of one play in particular that I remember, was Revis letting Welker by thinking Eric Smith was going to pick him up over the top. Smith didn't, and Welker was wide open. It was a blown coverage.

Revis, of course, proceeded to walk him down in the open field, despite starting out a good 5-7 yards behind when Welker caught the ball.

Quote:

Edwards spent seven NFL seasons with five different teams. You believe that five different coaching staffs all missed on their evaluation of Edwards?

I believe 5 different coaching staffs (actually 4) had no interest in running the Patriots' scheme back then. I believe teams were hoping for Edwards's athletic ability to translate into him being a game breaker, and it didn't. What they were left with was just a guy with quickness who could run the easier, shorter patterns that so many other guys could run. And teams had seen a lot of those types come through the door and there was a logjam and they preferred to try to find someone who could do more than just the expected. He was seen as a useful veteran addition for a year or two after he was declared a bust in Pittsburgh.

Quote:

Quick, not explosive. Welker isnít explosive. His straight-line speed leaves a lot to be desired. And I didnít claim he was the quickest receiver in the NFL either. I said heís quick. Not ďsomewhat quickĒ. Quick. No qualifiers. At the combine, he ran a 4.01 in the short shuttle. Thatís more than respectable. And he runs the best jerk route in the NFL.

Welker wasn't invited to the combine. NFL Draft Scout has his pro day figures up, though.

He may have had a very good shuttle time, but his 3-cone drill time was lousy (7.09).

If we're only comparing him to other players who are under 6 feet and under 200 pounds, I don't think he's all that much quicker than average for that classification.

Quote:

In 2005, after Weis left for Notre Dame and McDaniels took over game-calling responsibilities, Branch was the ďgo-toĒ in the slot.

If he was playing the same role in the same scheme as Welker, why was the average distance in which he caught a pass from the line of scrimmage that season 9.7 yards? (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5951/career : 12.8 AVG - 3.1 YAC avg)

Wes Welker's average distances in New England:

2007: 4.8
2008: 3.7
2009: 5.1
2010: 4.9
2011: 6.7
2012: 5.4

Might I suggest they actually weren't quite in comparable situations?

Quote:

How is hauling in 120 catches not prolific at all? Coaches know whatís coming. Know that No. 83 is getting his targets. For as much bemoaning as thereís been about his YPC, itís still higher than 11 YPC. Defenses donít just surrender first downs. Moving the chains is an integral part of offensive football. Welker does that.

Because a catch, by itself, is utterly worthless. You get nothing for the catch. It's what the catch results in that matters.

It would be like calling a back who carried it 400 times for 1200 yards "prolific."

1100+ yard seasons, by themselves, would not have anyone clamoring for the Hall of Fame. Especially when they are accompanied by single digit touchdowns.

But do them on 100+ catches every year, and all of a sudden people take notice...because they're operating under the false belief that reception total is a valuable statistic.

It's the exact opposite of the way it should be.

A receiver who gets 1100+ yard seasons, while not doing anything unheard of or worth declaring him a future HOFer for, is far more impressive when he does it on fewer receptions (and especially when they are accompanied by touchdowns).

You throw the ball to a receiver enough, especially with the right play design, and he's going to eventually rack up the yardage, no matter how slow and unexplosive he is.

As for first downs...teams don't want to surrender them, but when they are out-schemed, sometimes they have no choice. You can't tackle Welker if you're being blocked on the screen. Welker has always had low 1st down percentages for his receptions, too. He just gets so many freak'n passes that he's bound to rack up plenty of first downs, too.

Quote:

And using one of the most talented receivers of all-time to discredit Welker?

I'm illustrating what happens when an actual talent is inserted into a system where production itself is automatic. The great talent will add another dimension.

I fail to see what added dimension Welker provides. Your argument seems to simply be that other guys couldn't get open as much as him in his role. I disagree.

Scheme, Scheme, Scheme. This why you don't rate football player's talent based on their statistics. It would be one thing if the dude was winning on the outside and had a decent YPC, but the guy is always just a 10-11 YPC guy in an offense that slings it around as much as anyone.

Now the next question is....How good was Troy Brown?

Exactly, how many seasons did Brown catch 100 balls in a row? Or Patten, or Givens, Branch?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by WMD

Jesse realizing Walt was Santa Claus could really shake things up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

I don't know how old you are, but if you can get to 24/25 without getting arrested or killed, you've done well for yourself lol.